[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
iSCSI: DAP Last Call Comments
T p 36 22.214.171.124 Command Numbering and Acknowledging: 7th paragraph: if not in this document, where is the means to request immediate delivery for a command? T p 38 126.96.36.199 Response/Status Numbering and Acknowledging: 4th paragraph: this paragraph is too vague which may result in different error recovery initiations being implemented. T p 43 2.2.4 iSCSI Full Feature Phase: 16th paragraph: last sentence is not correct since out of order data delivery is allowed (if negotiated) T p 73 4.2 Text Mode Negotiation: 6th paragraph: 3rd sentence: change the "should" to a "must" T p 73 4.2 Text Mode Negotiation: 8th paragraph: the use of "Irrelevant" is a potential interoperability problem. Need to further specify the use of "Irrelevant". T p 73 4.2 Text Mode Negotiation: 9th paragraph: specify that a "key=NotUnderstood" is applicable for "X-keys" only. T p 103 6.1.1 Usage of Retry and 6.7 SCSI Timeouts: the semantics of Retry remain broken rendering it useless for tape operation. SCSI level error detection and recovery is the preferred mechanism. Refer to previous emails sent via the IPS reflector regarding this matter. T p 128 8.6 Considerations for State-dependent devices: last paragraph: don't agree with the statement that error recovery at the iSCSI level (specifically Retry in its current state) is advisable. Retry at the SCSI level is feasible and is not difficult (i.e., READ POSITION and LOCATE commands). This paragraph should be removed. T p 214 11.11 BidiInitialR2T: this text key provides no value and needs to be removed. InitialR2T should be used for both uni and bidirectional commands. In addition, if BidiInitialR2T were to be used, it will not function via an iSCSI-FCP gateway.
Last updated: Sun Jul 14 04:19:06 2002
11314 messages in chronological order